Safety Issues during Icing Effects on Offshore Platforms
Abstract
Over the years, the United States and other countries around the world have seen an increasing energy demand. With this has come the need to explore and drill for oil in areas such as the Gulf of Mexico (GOM). Superstructure icing from sea spray, snow, glaze, frost, and sleet has become a problem for these types of industries and can have a major impact on their operations. With the use of old and new technologies, icing effects can either be mitigated, reduced, or even eliminated. The technologies that have been researched originate from the aviation industry, the electric power industry, and ground transportation systems, including the use of chemicals (NaCl, CaCl₂, MgCl₂, and KCl), coatings, improved structural design, high-velocity fluids, heat, infrared energy, and manual deicing. Accordingly, the available literature is analyzed to identify research methods and technologies employed and to determine the conclusions reached by each study. The expected results will identify technologies effective in mitigating icing effects on platforms and determine the most effective solutions for reducing their impact. This analysis accounts for a variety of factors, including diverse platform designs that may respond differently to icing conditions.
2. Rashid T, Khawaja HA, Edvardsen K. Review of marine icing and anti-/de-icing systems. J Mar Eng Technol. 2016;15(3):1–16.
3. Ryerson CC. Assessment of superstructure ice protection as applied to offshore oil operations safety: Problems, hazards, needs, and potential transfer technologies. ERDC/CRREL TR. 2008;09-4.
4. Dehghani-Sanij AR, Dehghani SR, Naterer GF, Muzychka YS. Sea spray icing phenomena on marine vessels and offshore structures: Review and formulation. Ocean Eng. 2017;132:25–39.
5. Naseri M, Samuelsen EM. Unprecedented vessel-icing climatology based on spray-icing modelling and reanalysis data: A risk-based decision-making input for Arctic offshore industries. Atmosphere. 2019;10(4):197.
6. Chatterton M, Cook JC. The effects of icing on commercial fishing vessels. Worcester (UK): Worcester Polytechnic Institute; 2008.
7. Ackley SF, Itagaki K, Frank M. An evaluation of passive deicing, mechanical deicing and ice detection. CRREL Rep. 1977;IR-351.
8. Allaire M, LaForte J. Device and method for de-icing an elongated structural element. U.S. Patent 6,207,939; 2001 Mar 27.
9. Colson S. Documentation of liquid de-icing agents utilized during the winter of 2005–2006. Transp Res Div. 2006;Problem Solving 06-6.
10. Dawson P. Safety issues and concerns of forced air deicing systems. Palm Springs (CA): APD Aviation Inc; 2000. Report No.: TP 13664E.
11. Guest P. Mitigation and avoidance of vessel sea spray icing. 2008.
12. Shmal GY, Nadein VA, Makhutov NA, Truskov PA, Osipov VI. Hybrid modeling of offshore platforms’ stress-deformed and limit states taking into account probabilistic parameters. 2019 Nov 27.
13. Kuroiwa D. Icing and snow accretion on electric wires. CRREL Rep. 1965;RR-123.
14. LaForte J, Allaire M, Farzaneh M. Deicing device for cable. U.S. Patent 5,411,121; 1995 May 2.
15. Levelton. Guidelines for the selection of snow and ice control materials to mitigate environmental impacts. NCHRP Rep. 2007;577.
16. Dehghani-Sanij A, Mahmoodi M, Dehghani SR, Muzychka YS, Naterer GF. Experimental investigation of vertical marine surface icing in periodic spray and cold conditions. J Offshore Mech Arct Eng. 2019;141(2):021502.
17. Dehghani-Sanij AR, Dehghani SR, Naterer GF, Muzychka YS. Marine icing phenomena on vessels and offshore structures: Prediction and analysis. Ocean Eng. 2017;143:1–23.
| Files | ||
| Issue | Vol 14 No 3 (2022) | |
| Section | Review Article(s) | |
| Published | 2025-08-30 | |
| Keywords | ||
| Ice protection technologies Anti-icing Deicing Superstructure icing Safety. | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
